[FFmpeg-user] I found the bugs

[Paul B Mahol]

On Sun, Jun 16, 2024 at 11:33 AM Binarus <lists at binarus.de> wrote:

> I really have to kick in here, although I have no clue regarding the
> internals of FFMPEG, and although 90% of it are a mystery to me, and
> although I have to admit that I didn't get yet how to use it properly (and
> probably never will get that). That is, I can't contribute anything to
> solve your problem. Having said this:
>
> Yes, I am also impatient sometimes. And yes, I also have been very
> disappointed by the FFMPEG community support; sometimes, I wasn't able to
> get even the simplest explanations for questions that a developer should be
> able to answer with no effort. Actually, I have given up FFMPEG in the
> meantime for the same reasons that annoy you at the moment: Sometimes no
> reaction / explanation to bugs or simple questions etc. And yes, I also had
> situations where I was upset due to having invested a lot of time into
> analyzing and reporting a bug where then nothing happened.
>

Which bugs you reported on the official ffmpeg bug report site:
trac.ffmpeg.org? I would like to see the list of reported bugs.

The ffmpeg-user mailing list history lists single entry by yours mail
address, with no reply - the problem described there is very specific and
complex matter.

If you want to go professional and want to hire some FFmpeg official devs
to fix bugs in FFmpeg code, perhaps you can contact fflabs.eu community
directly?

There is also https://ffmpeg.org/consulting.html but the devs might be very
busy and not respond immediately.


>
> However, your behavior on this list is barely acceptable. Do you really
> expect to motivate anybody to communicate with you or to look at your bug
> report that way?
>
> I strongly advise you to make a few facts clear to yourself:
>
> - FFMPEG is an open source project that provides a highly sophisticated
> software to everybody *free of charge*.
>
> - FFMPEG's contributors *voluntarily* sacrifice a good part of their lives
> to provide software to millions of people they don't know *without getting
> compensated* in any way. In that sense, they are exemplary people who make
> the world better, and they deserve our respect for that.
>
> - You do not have *any* right to demand *anything* from the FFMPEG
> contributors, neither in a legal sense nor in a moral sense. You have no
> contract with them, you don't pay them, so what exactly makes you assume
> that you can demand anything from them?
>
> - Calling the behavior of a developer or other contributor a crime just
> because he doesn't react to your reports or comments as you expect is
> completely inappropriate.
>
> Since you have drawn a parallelism to court trials: In court, you would
> first be asked whether you have a contract with the developers that states
> that they must react to your reports within a certain time and in a certain
> fashion. If you have such a contract, and the developers have really
> violated it, then *perhaps* you would have the right to call their behavior
> a crime (but even then, the correct term might be infraction instead of
> crime, but I don't know the laws of the country where the FFMPEG project
> resides or where you reside). If you don't have such a contract (and I'm
> nearly sure you don't have one) and nevertheless call the developers
> criminals, then *your* behavior might be considered a crime in quite a few
> legislations, and you could get sued for defamation.
>
> If you want to learn about the legal relationship between you and the
> FFMPEG developers / contributors, I recommend reading the license file(s).
>
> - So please do yourself and the community a favor, show a respectful
> attitude towards people who spend their time for a good thing without
> getting paid for it, and focus on the technical discussion.
>
> - The behavior you have shown so far does not bring you closer to a
> solution, but primarily ruins your own reputation. I deeply respect other
> cultures than mine, and if your behavior is usual in your culture, then of
> course I respect this, too. However, then please note that this mailing
> list is an international open source mailing list, and you really should
> bring your behavior into line with the conventions (a.k.a. Netiquette) on
> such lists, regardless of your own culture.
>
> - If these technical issues are extremely important to you, then you might
> consider paying somebody for fixing them, or buying commercial software
> that does not show these issues. Perhaps you even could pay one of the
> FFMPEG developers directly or donate to the project to get the problem
> fixed (but I really don't know if the project policy allows this or if it
> is possible at all).
>
>
> Apart from that, my respect goes to @Jim DeLaHunt for having stayed so
> professional and cool during that discussion :-)
>
> Best regards,
>
> Binarus
>
> P.S. I have said what I wanted to say, and can't add to it. This will be
> my last message about this subject; I won't reply to follow-ups.
>
>
>
>
> On 16.06.2024 10:19, Mark Filipak wrote:
> > On 16/06/2024 03.51, Jim DeLaHunt wrote:
> >> On 2024-06-15 23:04, Mark Filipak wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 15/06/2024 23.39, Jim DeLaHunt wrote:
> >>>> On 2024-06-15 19:27, Mark Filipak wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> It would be nice if folks from here went here:
> >>>>> https://trac.ffmpeg.org/ticket/11055
> >>>>> and saw what is going on. It's up to 76 comments now, so what I ask
> will take you a while.
> >>>>> What's going on is a crime.
> >>>>
> >>>> What's the crime, detective?  All I see is two people talking past
> each other and not being clear about their evidence. I posted a comment
> with my feedback for you two.
> >>>
> >>> You posted an irrelevant comment supporting inadmissible info from one
> of the accused: FFprobe show_frames.
> >>
> >> _Who_ posted the criminal comment (the comment you describe as "What's
> going on is a crime")?  _I_ posted it?  Check again.
> >
> > No, Jim. I posted "it's a crime" here way before your comment on ticket
> 11055. "It's a crime" that MasterQuestionable is ignoring what would be
> legal proof in a court of law and is instead kicking up a load of dust. How
> anyone could argue that actual timestamps from actual packets plus actual
> timestamps from framecrc that match them perfectly are somehow disqualified
> or insufficient is beyond my comprehension. showinfo and show_frames are
> wrong and there's no two ways about it. The actual timestamps and what
> showinfo and show_frames report are miles apart. The bug in some internal
> routine that they use is wrong in this case, of a video with these
> particular properties, and I think that's true of '-ss' and '-to' and of
> transcoders in which AVC/H.264 is the source.
> >
> >> Note that the XML file which MasterQuestionable attached is from
> ffprobe's -show_entries, not -show_frames.
> >
> > Same thing.
> >
> >> If you want to assert that those are the same thing, and that
> -show_entries data is untrustworthy for the same reason that -show_frames
> data is, then you should have some evidence for that assertion.
> >
> > It doesn't matter, Jim. Do I have to find EVERY problem? I found two.
> Isn't that enough? Those two will lead to the others but it looks like it's
> going to be closed with no action, no code look, no testing. This all
> stinks and I'm sick of it.
> >
> > I know how to make perfect cuts and splices that play perfectly, open
> GOPs or closed GOPs, DTS-order or PTS-order, and I don't give a damn if
> FFmpeg wants to bury the news and leave everything unchanged. I'm finished
> with it. I got no support here and I see the picture clearly.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ffmpeg-user mailing list
> > ffmpeg-user at ffmpeg.org
> > https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user
> >
> > To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
> > ffmpeg-user-request at ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
> >
> _______________________________________________
> ffmpeg-user mailing list
> ffmpeg-user at ffmpeg.org
> https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user
>
> To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
> ffmpeg-user-request at ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
>